Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
So we're yack yacking about the incubator (again). The incubator AFAICT
replicated a tricameral vote. To release you must have:
...
The point? None, I just like pointing my finger childishly when someone
does something silly (like create a tricameral voting system... pret
Why are we discussing/considering the possibility of anything other than
a TLP incubation? If a project is comming in as part of another project
than an existing PMC is bringing it it in and doing so in accordance
with the policies, procedures and due-diligence that have been granted
under the
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Why are we discussing/considering the possibility of anything other than
a TLP incubation? If a project is comming in as part of another project
than an existing PMC is bringing it it in and doing so in accordance
with the policies, procedures and due-diligence that ha
Stephen McConnell wrote:
> Why are we discussing/considering the possibility of anything other than
> a TLP incubation? If a project is comming in as part of another project
> than an existing PMC is bringing it it in and doing so in accordance
> with the policies, procedures and due-diligence
Incubator PMC People,
Would be great to get some guideance and direction on the recent
activities that have been occuring. I have a (not trying to be smart)
terrible fear that I might be wasting my time, and I *hate* doing that.
I'd prefer to be officially told now to re-focus or stop before
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
> If you mean you saved over it, you can easily get the last version back.
no, i mean iw was working solely in preview, and hadn't saved it at all. :-(
i was waiting until it was further along.
--
#kenP-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/
A
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
> So we're yack yacking about the incubator (again).
if it bothers you so much, you don't have to participate. :-)
> The incubator AFAICT
> replicated a tricameral vote. To release you must have:
what do you mean by 'release'? release software, or be released
from the
Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
> To rephrase Andrew's tricameral process, recasting with veto in mind ...
>
> 1. A Sponsoring Entity votes to accept a candidate
not necessary.
> 2. The Sponsoring Entity votes to exit the candidate.
not applicable.
> 3. Incubator PMC hold the right to veto.
not t
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Why are we discussing/considering the possibility of anything other
than a TLP incubation? If a project is comming in as part of another
project than an existing PMC is bringing it it in and doing so in
accordance with the policies, procedu
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Why are we discussing/considering the possibility of anything other
than a TLP incubation?
...
Read this [1] and you will have all the answers.
[1] http://incubator.apache.org/resolution.html
Nicola:
I'll draw your
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
>
> I'd prefer to be officially told now to re-focus or stop before we go
> any further.
my first reaction is: please be patient. people don't function on
internet time, and most of us (including you) have other demands on
our time. so poke and prod all you like to ke
Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
> The phrase "independent PMC status" is pertinent. Reading on in the
> charter you will find wording that expands the above core, however the
> expansion is hard to rationalize beyond incorporation of "full projects"
> within umbrella PMCs. I think it is totally rea
In not entirely related context, an RoUS observed that:
> people don't function on internet time, and most of us
> have other demands on our time. so poke and prod all
> you like to keep things moving, but don't anticipate
> instant responses -- or even cogent ones within
> 24 hours. :-)
Speaki
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
> Speaking of which ... what is the status of looking at incubation for the
> Directory project? My personal guess is that it got lost in the talk about
> incubating the incubator.
:-)
> What needs be done to move that forward? :-)
personally, i think it should be con
On 9/29/2003 6:34 AM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
so far, i at least am appreciating your input and don't want you to stop.
I think that a few more 1 liners like this would help to allay Berin's
concerns, and my own. More people are trying to come and help. Please
let us know if we are go
The PMC is on the incubator general list. DO NOT cross-post items
from public mailing lists onto the pmc lists. The only reason to
post information to the pmc lists is if it is sensitive information
that is not appropriate for a public forum. All discussion and
setting of goals/procedure/documen
The wiki pages would already be committed to cvs if I were not already
waiting for you to have access to do it yourself. I'll just assume
you won't mind having karma on incubator and add you to avail...Done.
Berin Lautenbach and Noel Bergman now have karma for incubator and
incubator-site, which m
> > Speaking of which ... what is the status of looking at incubation for the
> > Directory project? My personal guess is that it got lost in the talk about
> > incubating the incubator.
>
> :-)
>
> > What needs be done to move that forward? :-)
>
> personally, i think it should be considered
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
The wiki pages would already be committed to cvs if I were not already
waiting for you to have access to do it yourself. I'll just assume
you won't mind having karma on incubator and add you to avail...Done.
Berin Lautenbach and Noel Bergman now have karma for incubator and
19 matches
Mail list logo
